DIF的跨部门方法:比较不同方法的结果

IF 2.1 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Assessment Pub Date : 2022-04-03 DOI:10.1080/10627197.2022.2094757
Michaeline Russell, Olivia Szendey, Zhushan Li
{"title":"DIF的跨部门方法:比较不同方法的结果","authors":"Michaeline Russell, Olivia Szendey, Zhushan Li","doi":"10.1080/10627197.2022.2094757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Recent research provides evidence that an intersectional approach to defining reference and focal groups results in a higher percentage of comparisons flagged for potential DIF. The study presented here examined the generalizability of this pattern across methods for examining DIF. While the level of DIF detection differed among the four methods examined, the pattern in which the intersectional approach yielded a substantially larger percentage of flagged comparisons compared to the traditional approach was consistent across three of the four methods. The study explores implications that an intersectional approach to examining differential item functioning has for use by large-scale test development programs and identifies further research needed to support the adoption of an intersectional approach to DIF analyses.","PeriodicalId":46209,"journal":{"name":"Educational Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Intersectional Approach to DIF: Comparing Outcomes across Methods\",\"authors\":\"Michaeline Russell, Olivia Szendey, Zhushan Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10627197.2022.2094757\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Recent research provides evidence that an intersectional approach to defining reference and focal groups results in a higher percentage of comparisons flagged for potential DIF. The study presented here examined the generalizability of this pattern across methods for examining DIF. While the level of DIF detection differed among the four methods examined, the pattern in which the intersectional approach yielded a substantially larger percentage of flagged comparisons compared to the traditional approach was consistent across three of the four methods. The study explores implications that an intersectional approach to examining differential item functioning has for use by large-scale test development programs and identifies further research needed to support the adoption of an intersectional approach to DIF analyses.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46209,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Assessment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2022.2094757\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2022.2094757","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要最近的研究提供了证据,证明定义参考群体和焦点群体的跨部门方法会导致潜在DIF的比较比例更高。本文提出的研究检验了这种模式在DIF检查方法中的可推广性。虽然所检查的四种方法的DIF检测水平不同,但与传统方法相比,交叉方法产生的标记比较百分比要高得多,这一模式在四种方法中的三种方法中是一致的。该研究探讨了检查差异项目功能的跨部门方法对大规模测试开发项目的影响,并确定了支持采用跨部门方法进行DIF分析所需的进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An Intersectional Approach to DIF: Comparing Outcomes across Methods
ABSTRACT Recent research provides evidence that an intersectional approach to defining reference and focal groups results in a higher percentage of comparisons flagged for potential DIF. The study presented here examined the generalizability of this pattern across methods for examining DIF. While the level of DIF detection differed among the four methods examined, the pattern in which the intersectional approach yielded a substantially larger percentage of flagged comparisons compared to the traditional approach was consistent across three of the four methods. The study explores implications that an intersectional approach to examining differential item functioning has for use by large-scale test development programs and identifies further research needed to support the adoption of an intersectional approach to DIF analyses.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Assessment
Educational Assessment EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Educational Assessment publishes original research and scholarship on the assessment of individuals, groups, and programs in educational settings. It includes theory, methodological approaches and empirical research in the appraisal of the learning and achievement of students and teachers, young children and adults, and novices and experts. The journal reports on current large-scale testing practices, discusses alternative approaches, presents scholarship on classroom assessment practices and includes assessment topics debated at the national level. It welcomes both conceptual and empirical pieces and encourages articles that provide a strong bridge between theory and/or empirical research and the implications for educational policy and/or practice.
期刊最新文献
Dialect and Mathematics Performance in African American Children Who Use AAE: Insights from Explanatory IRT and Error Analysis An Analysis of DIF and Sources of DIF in Achievement Motivation Items Using Anchoring Vignettes Resolving and Re-Scoring Constructed Response Items in Mixed-Format Assessments: An Exploration of Three Approaches Extending Principles of Evidence-Centered Design for Diverse Populations: K–12 English Learners with the Most Significant Cognitive Disabilities Reading Comprehension Tests: Students’ Question Reading and Responding Behavior
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1